02:3402:34, 26 June 2020diffhist+4
Mole (animal)
“close”—> “evocative”: the former too strongly evokes phylogenetic narrowness. This circumstance resembles even morphological similarity to faintly to use “close” even loosely. For shame!Tags: Mobile editMobile app editiOS app edit
09:4209:42, 23 June 2020diffhist−31
Edgewater
→Other uses: If you comprehend my shortly earlier edits to the earlier section , you can construct yr own mental summary: res ipse loquiturTags: Mobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
08:5308:53, 23 June 2020diffhist+36
Edgewater
→United States: * Reorg: Format was chaotic; could have been finished, but my redesign IMO is 1. Thoro’ly iimpl’d 2. Far more useful to users. * Exactly one blue lk per article. (One red lk, as well, IF a RS for it seems plausible; my retention of the red link is no warrant of such plausibility; another —. more interested and informed — Ed’r is welcome to repl, per an *informed* judgement )Tags: Mobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
19:3219:32, 22 June 2020diffhist−5 m
Ontology
minor, and just to avoid drawing undue distraction by the kinda jarring 16xx/17th association and the ordinal/cardinal (no-year-0 (& perhaps ontological paradox)Tags: Mobile editMobile app editiOS app edit
16:3516:35, 22 June 2020diffhist+5
Ontology
IMO, it was jarring to use the cardinal years so close to the ordinal centuries: It was accurate, but inexpedient.Tags: Mobile editMobile app editiOS app edit
18:2318:23, 20 June 2020diffhist+2
HMS Lochinvar
It has been definitively established by E N Whitehead and in Principia Mathematica, c, 1918, tHat 0ne and Two have Three as their sum.Tags: Mobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit